Dataset Information

Clinician and staff perspectives on potential disparities introduced by the rapid implementation of telehealth services during COVID-19: a mixed-methods analysis.

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly altered ambulatory health care delivery and may have worsened disparities in health care access. To assess the telehealth implementation experiences of ambulatory personnel in different disciplines and their perspectives on potential telehealth disparities, and to make recommendations for more equitable telehealth delivery. We used a convergent parallel mixed-methods design. Clinic managers from geriatric medicine, internal medicine, and psychiatry e-mailed a survey to clinicians and staff regarding experiences with telehealth care delivery. Quantitative survey responses were analyzed with Fisher's Exact tests. Qualitative responses were coded thematically. Recommendations were categorized by type of implementation strategy. Quantitative and qualitative findings on telehealth disparities were merged in a joint data display. Respondents (n = 147, 57% response rate) were distributed across three specialties: 66% internal medicine, 19% psychiatry, and 14% geriatric medicine. Prior to 2020, 77% of clinicians had never delivered telehealth services. By Spring 2020, 78% reported conducting more than half of clinic visits by telehealth. Among clinicians, 52% agreed/strongly agreed that rapid telehealth implementation exacerbated access to care disparities to: older adult patients, those with limited internet access, and those needing interpretation services. Staff expressed similar difficulties with telehealth set-up especially for these patients. To improve telehealth equity, clinicians recommended to: (i) change infrastructure; (ii) train and educate stakeholders; and (iii) support clinicians. Clinicians and staff reported specific subpopulations had challenges in accessing telehealth visits. To avoid perpetuating telehealth access disparities, further co-discovery of equitable implementation strategies with patients and clinics are urgently needed.

SUBMITTER: Phimphasone-Brady P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8344776 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAt the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a rapid increase in the use of telehealth services at the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which was accelerated by state and local policies mandating stay-at-home orders and restricting nonurgent in-person appointments. Even though the VA was an early adopter of telehealth in the late 1990s, the vast majority of VA outpatient care continued to be face-to-face visits through February 2020.ObjectiveWe compared telehealth service use at a VA Medical Center, Greater Los Angeles across 3 clinics (primary care [PC], cardiology, and home-based primary care [HBPC]) 12 months before and 12 months after the onset of COVID-19 (March 2020).MethodsWe used a parallel mixed methods approach including simultaneous quantitative and qualitative approaches. The distribution of monthly outpatient and telehealth visits, as well as telephone and VA Video Connect encounters were examined for each clinic. Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with 34 staff involved in telehealth services within PC, cardiology, and HBPC during COVID-19. All audiotaped interviews were transcribed and analyzed by identifying key themes.ResultsPrior to COVID-19, telehealth use was minimal at all 3 clinics, but at the onset of COVID-19, telehealth use increased substantially at all 3 clinics. Telephone was the main modality of patient choice. Compared with PC and cardiology, video-based care had the greatest increase in HBPC. Several important barriers (multiple steps for videoconferencing, creation of new scheduling grids, and limited access to the internet and internet-connected devices) and facilitators (flexibility in using different video-capable platforms, technical support for patients, identification of staff telehealth champions, and development of workflows to help incorporate telehealth into treatment plans) were noted.ConclusionsTechnological issues must be addressed at the forefront of telehealth evolution to achieve access for all patient populations with different socioeconomic backgrounds, living situations and locations, and health conditions. The unprecedented expansion of telehealth during COVID-19 provides opportunities to create lasting telehealth solutions to improve access to care beyond the pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundWhen children suffer acute pain, the ambulance service is often involved to provide initial assessment, treatment, and transport. Several predictors of effective pain management have been identified, including children who are younger (0-5 years), administered analgesics, and living in homes from more affluent areas.ObjectiveTo explain previously identified predictors of effective prehospital pain management in children.DesignMixed methods sequential explanatory study.Setting and participantsEast Midlands Ambulance Service National Health Service Trust paramedics and emergency medical technicians (EMTs) participated in face-to-face semi-structured interviews. These were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded using thematic analysis. Meta-inferences were generated and illustrated within a joint display.ResultsTwelve clinicians (9 paramedics and 3 EMTs) were interviewed. Median (interquartile range) age was 43.5 years (41.5, 45.75), 58% were male (n = 7) and 58% were parents (n = 7). Possible explanations were provided for all predictors. Younger children were perceived to express more emotion, were easier to distract, and lived more in the moment than their older counterparts, which explained why younger children were more likely to achieve effective pain management. Analgesics were perceived to have a psychosocial benefit in addition to the pharmacological action. Ambulance clinicians felt that children living in more affluent areas were more likely to achieve effective pain management because the kempt environment facilitated assessment and management and clinicians spent more time on scene; this allowed more time for analgesics to take effect. Participants perceived paramedics to be more confident, and it was found that paramedics were older, more experienced, had a greater scope of practice, and spent more time on scene than EMTs.ConclusionPrehospital pain management in children could be improved by facilitating and prioritizing analgesic administration and by ambulance services ensuring a paramedic, or highly trained clinician, is present on each vehicle, necessitating long-term commitment to staff development.

Project description:BackgroundThe onset of the COVID-19 pandemic challenged healthcare providers to adapt their models of care and leverage technology to continue to provide necessary care while reducing the likelihood of exposure. One setting that faced a unique set of challenges and opportunities was free and charitable clinics. In response to the emerging pandemic, The North Carolina Association for Free and Charitable Clinics (NCAFCC) offered their 66 member clinics access to a telehealth platform, free of charge.ObjectiveThis paper explores the varied perspectives of leaders in the NCAFCC member clinics regarding the implementation of telehealth services to facilitate continuity of care for patients during the height of the pandemic.DesignThis qualitative study is part of a broader research effort to understand and contextualize the experience of implementing and using telehealth services by North Carolina free and charitable clinics during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The research team conducted 13 key informant interviews and employed thematic analysis and grounded theory to explore critical themes and construct a model based on the CFIR to describe the use of telehealth in free and charitable clinics.ResultsTwelve clinic managers and executive directors from free and charitable clinics across the state participated in the key informant interviews providing their unique perspective on the experience of implementing telehealth services in a free and charitable clinic environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. When examined within the lens of the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR), 3 key themes emerged from the key informant interviews: mission driven patient centered care, resilience and resourcefulness, and immediate implementation.ConclusionsThis study aligns with existing literature regarding telehealth implementation across other safety net provider settings and highlights the key implementation factors, organizational elements, provider perspectives, and patient needs that must collectively be considered when implementing new technologies, especially in a low-resource, high need healthcare setting. The study showcases the implementation climate, resourcefulness, and mission driven approach that allowed many NCAFCC clinics to respond to an emergent situation by adopting and implementing a telehealth platform in a period of 2 weeks or less.

Project description:BackgroundThe importance of reducing low-value care (LVC) is increasingly recognized, but the impact of de-implementation on the patient-clinician relationship is not well understood. This mixed-methods study explored the impact of LVC de-implementation on the patient-clinician relationship.MethodsAdult primary care patients from a large Virginia health system volunteered to participate in a survey (n = 232) or interview (n = 24). Participants completed the Patient-Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9) after reading a vignette about a clinician declining to provide a low-value service: antibiotics for acute sinusitis (LVC-antibiotics); screening EKG (LVC-EKG); screening vitamin D test (LVC-vitamin D); or an alternate vignette about a high-value service, and imagining that their own primary care clinician had acted in the same manner. A different sample of participants was asked to imagine that their own primary care clinician did not order LVC-antibiotics or LVC-EKG and then respond to semi-structured interview questions. Outcomes data included participant demographics, PDRQ-9 scores (higher score = greater relationship integrity), and content analysis of transcribed interviews. Differences in PDRQ-9 scores were analyzed using one-way ANOVA. Data were integrated for analysis and interpretation.ResultsAlthough participants generally agreed with the vignette narrative (not providing LVC), many demonstrated difficulty comprehending the broad concept of LVC and potential harms. The topic triggered memories of negative experiences with healthcare (typically poor-quality care, not necessarily LVC). The most common recommendation for reducing LVC was for patients to take greater responsibility for their own health. Most participants believed that their relationship with their clinician would not be negatively impacted by denial of LVC because they trusted their clinician's guidance. Participants emphasized that trusted clinicians are those who listen to them, spend time with them, and offer understandable advice. Some felt that not providing LVC would actually increase their trust in their clinician. Similar PDRQ-9 scores were observed for LVC-antibiotics (38.9), LVC-EKG (37.5), and the alternate vignette (36.4), but LVC-vitamin D was associated with a significantly lower score (31.2) (p < 0.05).ConclusionsIn this vignette-based study, we observed minimal impact of LVC de-implementation on the patient-clinician relationship, although service-specific differences surfaced. Further situation-based research is needed to confirm study findings.

Project description:BackgroundThe burden of obesity is high among US veterans, yet many face barriers to engaging in in-person, facility-based treatment programs. To improve access to weight-management services, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) developed TeleMOVE, a home-based, 82-day curriculum that utilizes in-home messaging devices to promote weight loss in VHA patients facing barriers to accessing facility-based services.ObjectiveThe primary aim was to establish preliminary evidence for the program by comparing outcomes for TeleMOVE with standard, facility-based MOVE weight-management services (group, individual modalities) over the evaluation period based on the number of patients enrolled per site and the program's clinical effectiveness, as demonstrated by average weight lost per patient. The secondary aim was to understand factors influencing TeleMOVE implementation variability across demonstration sites to develop recommendations to improve national program dissemination.MethodsWe employed a formative mixed-methods design to evaluate the phased implementation of TeleMOVE at 9 demonstration sites and compare patient- and site-level measures of program uptake. Data were collected between October 1, 2009 and September 30, 2011. Patient-level program outcomes were extracted from VHA patient care databases to evaluate program enrollment rates and clinical outcomes. To assess preliminary clinical effectiveness, weight loss outcomes for veterans who enrolled in TeleMOVE were compared with outcomes for veterans enrolled in standard MOVE! at each demonstration site, as well as with national averages during the first 2 years of program implementation. For the secondary aim, we invited program stakeholders to participate in 2 rounds of semistructured interviews about aspects of TeleMOVE implementation processes, site-level contextual factors, and program delivery. Twenty-eight stakeholders participated in audio-recorded interviews.ResultsAlthough stakeholders at 3 sites declined to be interviewed, objective program uptake was high at 2 sites, delayed-high at 2 sites, and low at 5 sites. At 6 months post enrollment, the mean weight loss was comparable for TeleMOVE (n=417) and MOVE! (n=1543) participants at -5.2 lb (SD 14.4) and -5.1 lb (SD 12.2), respectively (P=.91). All sites reported high program complexity because TeleMOVE required more staff time per participant than MOVE! due to logistical and technical assistance issues related to the devices. High-uptake sites overcame implementation challenges by leveraging communication networks with stakeholders, adapting the program to patient needs whenever possible, setting programmatic goals and monitoring feedback of results, and taking time to reflect and evaluate on delivery to foster incremental delivery improvements, whereas low-uptake sites reported less leadership support and effective communication among stakeholders.ConclusionsThis implementation evaluation of a clinical telehealth program demonstrated the value of partnership-based research in which researchers not only provided operational leaders with feedback regarding the effectiveness of a new program but also relevant feedback into contextual factors related to program implementation to enable adaptations for national deployment efforts.

Project description:BackgroundWhen the US Department of Health and Human Services instituted a State of Public Health Emergency (PHE) during the COVID-19 pandemic, many telehealth flexibilities were fast-tracked to allow state Medicaid agencies to reimburse new specialty services, sites of care, and mediums such as FaceTime to communicate with patients.. This resulted in expanded access to care for financially vulnerable Medicaid patients, as evidenced by an uptick in telehealth use. Research has mostly focused on telehealth reimbursement for limited use cases such as rural primary care, without broader consideration for how telehealth can be appropriately mainstreamed and maintained.ObjectiveThis study sought to (1) evaluate the continuation of flexible telehealth reimbursement broadly, beyond the COVID-19 pandemic; (2) analyze the clinical effectiveness of the new telehealth services; and (3) offer code-by-code reimbursement guidance to state Medicaid leaders.MethodsWe surveyed 10 state Medicaid medical directors (MMDs) who are responsible for the scientific and clinical appropriateness of Medicaid policies in their respective states. Participants were asked to complete an internet-based survey with a list of medical billing codes, grouped by service type, and asked if they believed they should be reimbursed by Medicaid on a permanent basis. Additional questions covered more detailed recommendations, such as reimbursing video with audio versus audio-only, guardrails for certain specialty services, and motivations behind responses.ResultsThe MMDs felt that the majority of services should be reimbursed via some modality of telehealth after the PHE, with the most support for video combined with audio compared to audio-only. There were exceptions on both ends of the spectrum, where services such as pulmonary diagnostics were not recommended to be reimbursed in any form and services such as psychotherapy for mental health had the most support for audio-only. The vast majority of MMDs were supportive of reimbursement for remote monitoring services, but some preferred to have some reimbursement guardrails. We found that 90% (n=9) of MMDs were supportive of reimbursement for telehealth interprofessional services, while half (n=5) of the respondents felt that there should be continued guardrails for reimbursement. Motivations for continuing reimbursement flexibility were largely attributed to improving access to care, improving outcomes, and improving equity among the Medicaid patient population.ConclusionsThere is a strong clinical endorsement to continue the telehealth flexibility enabled by the PHE, primarily for video combined with audio telehealth, with caution against audio-only telehealth in situations where hands-on intervention is necessary for diagnosis or treatment. There is also support for reimbursing remote monitoring services and telehealth interprofessional services, albeit with guardrails. These results are primarily from a perspective of improving access, outcomes, and equity; other state-specific factors such as fiscal impact and technical implementation may need to be taken into account when considering reimbursement decisions on telehealth.

Project description:BackgroundLong-term care (LTC) homes provide 24-hour care for people living with complex care needs. LTC staff assist older adults living with chronic conditions such as Alzheimer disease, related dementias, and stroke, which can cause communication disorders. In addition to the complex cognitive challenges that can impact communication, further difficulties can arise from cultural-language differences between care staff and residents. Breakdowns in caregiver-resident communication can negatively impact the delivery of person-centered care. Recent advances in mobile technology, specifically mobile devices (tablets and smartphones) and their software apps, offer innovative solutions for supporting everyday communication between care staff and residents. To date, little is known about the care staff's perspectives on the different ways that mobile technology could be used to support communication with residents.ObjectiveThis study aims to identify care staff's perspectives on the different ways of using devices and apps to support everyday communication with adults living in LTC homes and the priority care areas for using mobile technology to support communication with residents.MethodsThis descriptive study employed concept mapping methods to explore care staff's perspectives about ways of using mobile technology with residents and to identify the usefulness, practicality, and probable uses of mobile technology to support communication in priority care areas. Concept mapping is an integrated mixed methods approach (qualitative and quantitative) that uses a structured process to identify priority areas for planning and evaluation. In total, 13 care staff from a single LTC home participated in this study. Concept mapping includes 2 main data collection phases: (1) statement generations through brainstorming and (2) statement structuring through sorting and rating. Brainstorming took place in person in a group session, whereas sorting and rating occurred individually after the brainstorming session. Concept mapping data were analyzed using multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis to generate numerous interpretable data maps and displays.ResultsParticipants generated 67 unique statements during the brainstorming session. Following the sorting and rating of the statements, a concept map analysis was performed. In total, 5 clusters were identified: (1) connect, (2) care management, (3) facilitate, (4) caregiving, and (5) overcoming barriers. Although all 5 clusters were rated as useful, with a mean score of 4.1 to 4.5 (Likert: 1-5), the care staff rated cluster 2 (care management) as highest on usefulness, practicality, and probable use of mobile technology to support communication in LTC.ConclusionsThis study provided insight into the viewpoints of care staff regarding the different ways mobile technology could be used to support caregiver-resident communication in LTC. Our findings suggest that care management, facilitating communication, and overcoming barriers are 3 priority target areas for implementing mobile health interventions to promote person-centered care and resident-centered care.

Project description:BackgroundThe First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) service has been shown to reduce the wait for care and improve clinical outcomes in initial evaluations. These findings led to the national scaling of FREED in England. To support this scaling, we conducted a mixed method evaluation of the perceptions and experiences of clinicians in the early phases of scaling. The Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used as a conceptual lens to understand if and how FREED becomes embedded in routine practice.MethodsThe convergent mixed method evaluation included 21 semi-structured interviews with clinicians from early adopter sites and 211 surveys administered to clinicians before, immediately after and 3 months after the FREED training. The interview guide and survey included questions evaluating attitudes towards early intervention for eating disorders (EDs) and NPT mechanisms. Interview data were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis. The NPT was applied to the inductively derived themes to evaluate if and how NPT domains impacted the implementation. Survey data were analysed using multilevel growth models.ResultsSix themes and 15 subthemes captured barriers and facilitators to implementation at the patient, clinician, service, intervention, implementation and wider system levels. These interacted with the NPT mechanisms to facilitate or hinder the embedding of FREED. Overall, clinicians were enthusiastic and positive towards early intervention for EDs and FREED, largely because of the expectation of improved patient outcomes. This was a considerable driver in the uptake and implementation of FREED. Clinicians also had reservations about capacity and the potential impact on other patients, which, at times, was a barrier for its use. The FREED training led to significant improvements in positive attitudes and NPT mechanisms that were largely maintained at the 3-month follow-up. However, negative attitudes did not significantly improve following training.ConclusionsPositive attitudes towards early intervention for EDs increased enthusiasm and engagement with the model. Features of the model and its implementation were effective at developing adopter commitment and capabilities. However, there were aspects of the model and its implementation which require attention in the future (e.g., capacity and the potential impact on the wider service).

Dataset Information

Clinician and staff perspectives on potential disparities introduced by the rapid implementation of telehealth services during COVID-19: a mixed-methods analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets